Patterning boards?

P

Potashminer

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Uber Super GunNutz
Rating - 100%
589   0   0
Location
Western Manitoba
So, apologies if this has been previously discussed - please let me know where??

So, I have never seen or used a patterning "board" / "grease plate" for shotgun. Some recent questions about shot sizes, or mixed shot within same load - how does it perform? I understand that 40 yards, 30" diameter is pretty much standard. So how are they made? I was thinking like a 48" x 48" plate - maybe spray paint or some white grease - shoot at it - count hits or whatever, re-spray or re-grease and repeat. Is that close?

Do they have an aiming point on them - 4" or 6" "dot" in the centre?? Are they mounted rigid or swinging? How thick is needed - I assume standard mild steel can be used, or is tempered stuff required?

For my purposes is for lead shot only - not steel, not slugs, not rifles (not even rimfire).
 
Last edited:
I've always used 36 or 48" paper on a ad hoc stand at whatever yardage I expect to shoot. This gives me pattern density and eveness and in addition lets me see if the pattern is centered, high ,low, left or right . I put a simple bull in the middle , shoot, label the target and take it home to analyse more precisely than I can in the field.
 
Yep. That way sounds simple enough to do. Was thinking I am almost always dragging around a cell phone - was thinking to take picture of pattern for posterity. So really do not need a permanent record - at least not yet into that detail of the results!!!! Was more thinking to see if patterns had holes big enough for bird to fly through or not - and I had read about shot stringing lengths and so on, but not there ... Almost to prove to self whether shot goes to where I thought that I had aimed...
 
Last edited:
Steel shot - had read on a forum on Interweb - shooters 100% getting struck by bounce back of steel shot from a 40 yard steel "grease plate" - same guys say never has happened with lead shot. So likely, at minimum, need the plate tipped forward to direct "bounce" downward, for steel. I have never used it, so only my guess...

Also some discussion about distances for various events - some shooters doing patterning as close as 16 yards, so that might be part of it?
 
Last edited:
I have never shot steel pellets, so do not know how to compare to lead. For sure is store-bought systems like you describe - and vendors of pre-printed paper patterning targets - from other forums as if the paper is stapled to a plywood backing, shot at, and then replaced for next shot.
 
I guess i'll have to do my own testing haha. I've been googling, and the general consesus is that lead spreads more with less penetration, while steel spreads less with more penetration. Annoyingly, im a number guy, so i either have to digitally dig more for percentage differences, or get some field data myself haha.
 
I guess the pattern thing gets about density (count) of the pellets on target. I would have thought that since lead shot pellet is heavier than same diameter steel shot pellet, if at same velocity, the lead would penetrate deeper - more "momentum", or something. Maybe steel does not deform as much after impact?? Patterning, as I understand it, will not tell you anything about momentum or post impact performance. When I last shot ducks - so way back when lead shot was still legal - No. 4 and No. 5 shot was pretty standard size lead shot used for ducks in Saskatchewan Prairies. I am sure today with steel is to increase size two steps - so No. 2 and No. 3 steel used for ducks now-a-days?? I do not know.
 
I use a stand that i clip 2'×2' thin cardboard to. I use it for steel and lead and with a proper backstop slugs as well. Easily mobile and light weight.
Just a pipe coming up from a base with a piece of plywood bolted to it. Big heavy black clips top and 1 side to hold the paper against it in the wind.
No pellets ever come back and i get the thin cardboard for free at work
Another cheap and effective pattern board is liberal campaign signs
 
Potashminer said:
I guess the pattern thing gets about density (count) of the pellets on target. I would have thought that since lead shot pellet is heavier than same diameter steel shot pellet, if at same velocity, the lead would penetrate deeper - more "momentum", or something. Maybe steel does not deform as much after impact?? Patterning, as I understand it, will not tell you anything about momentum or post impact performance. When I last shot ducks - so way back when lead shot was still legal - No. 4 and No. 5 shot was pretty standard size lead shot used for ducks in Saskatchewan Prairies. I am sure today with steel is to increase size two steps - so No. 2 and No. 3 steel used for ducks now-a-days?? I do not know.
Click to expand...

The reason lead doesnt penetrate as well is because of the lead's properties: it's soft. Upon contact, it starts to flatten and slow. Steel on the other hand, being more solid, carries it's energy better upon impact. So yeah, you hit the nail on the head there haha! And yes, #2/#3 shot is the norm now for duck.
 
All you ever wanted to know about pattern testing by Neil Winston - claytargettesting.com
Neil also published his work on Trapshooters.com. Sadly, Neil Winston is no longer with us.
A greased pattern plate is useful for point of impact testing.
Paper pattern testing is necessary for pattern efficiency testing. There is software for analyzing pattern images.
You need at least ten patterns for each variable tested, to give statistically valid results.
Pattern testing is tedious work. Few are willing to put in the effort to get scientifically valid analysis.
 
Last edited:
saskbooknut said:
All you ever wanted to know about pattern testing by Neil Winston - claytargrettesting.com
Neil also published his work on Trapshooters.com. Sadly, Neil Winston is no longer with us.
A greased pattern plate is useful for point of impact testing.
Paper pattern testing is necessary for pattern efficiency testing. There is software for analyzing pattern images.
You need at least ten patterns for each variable tested, to give statistically valid results.
Pattern testing is tedious work. Few are willing to put in the effort to get scientifically valid analysis.
Click to expand...

The first link didn't work, but the second one did.

That entire forum is intense when it comes to analytical shot data! I have a lot of reading to do haha.
 
The Brits use a 6' square steel plate and a bucket of whitewash. Just give it another coat between shots.

What you're looking for is uniform density, from edge to edge. You don't want holes that a bird could sneak through, or a centre heavy pattern.

As far as shot size goes, you need to find a balance between pattern density, and having a heavy enough pellet to penetrate whatever you happen to be hunting.

P.S. you can also use a pattern plate to check your gun fit.
 
Mazeofmystery said:
The reason lead doesnt penetrate as well is because of the lead's properties: it's soft. Upon contact, it starts to flatten and slow. Steel on the other hand, being more solid, carries it's energy better upon impact. So yeah, you hit the nail on the head there haha! And yes, #2/#3 shot is the norm now for duck.
Click to expand...

Interesting implication! I do recall the time of the change from lead to steel shot for waterfowl. Was pretty much accepted that steel was a poor second cousin to lead for shot on waterfowl, but the lead was no longer legal - so various non-toxic substitutes were used - I think steel came out least expensive - not necessarily the "best". Even heat treated / "hardened" lead shot is not hard like steel pellets, but plenty hard "enough". As if that is being forgotten. Steel is lighter - so looses velocity faster. Might have the penetration advantage for same size at same velocity, but how much penetration is needed to kill a duck or a goose? I was on several shoots from pits in fields where no problem to limit out on ducks with #4 lead or on geese (Canada's and Speckle Belly) with #2 lead. Usually was 2 3/4" 12 gauge for duck and 3" 12 gauge for goose - almost all I recall being used by self or partners was Imperial brand. A miss is a miss - can't blame that on the pellets!!! But, to my knowledge, nothing was ever patterned, nothing was ever tested ballistically - just what Dad used, so what I use. And birds fell down when shot at, so good enough.
 
9.3mauser said:
The Brits use a 6' square steel plate and a bucket of whitewash. Just give it another coat between shots.

What you're looking for is uniform density, from edge to edge. You don't want holes that a bird could sneak through, or a centre heavy pattern.

As far as shot size goes, you need to find a balance between pattern density, and having a heavy enough pellet to penetrate whatever you happen to be hunting.

P.S. you can also use a pattern plate to check your gun fit.
Click to expand...


Yep, what I was hoping to do. So, just chip a clay bird in flight - was that because of a hole / gap in pattern, or because I just so managed to catch it with edge of pattern - next one gets powdered - what did I do different, if anything? Same with look, mount and fire - where is centre of that pattern compared to where I was looking - at the moment, I do not know, for sure. There is enough shotguns here, is time to find out.
 
We have a steel grease plate for patterning at Sherwood Park Fish & Game Assoc. It's good for determining point of impact and getting a general idea of pattern uniformity, but I wouldn't count on it for in depth analytical work. Black grease is applied with a big paint brush. There is not a lot of contrast caused by the impacts, I doubt you could get a good photo.

I'm actually the person who picked it up from the steel supplier several years ago, but I don't remember what it was, specifically. I'm guessing 3/8" thick, grade 70 boiler plate? We don't allow use with steel shot, due to concerns with bouncing, mostly.
 
Thank you, BattleRife. Was just reading that some users dump quart/liter of white oil based paint into grease pail and mix - apparently works to lighten up the stuff considerably - is on my plan to "try"...
 
Potashminer said:
Interesting implication! I do recall the time of the change from lead to steel shot for waterfowl. Was pretty much accepted that steel was a poor second cousin to lead for shot on waterfowl, but the lead was no longer legal - so various non-toxic substitutes were used - I think steel came out least expensive - not necessarily the "best". Even heat treated / "hardened" lead shot is not hard like steel pellets, but plenty hard "enough". As if that is being forgotten. Steel is lighter - so looses velocity faster. Might have the penetration advantage for same size at same velocity, but how much penetration is needed to kill a duck or a goose? I was on several shoots from pits in fields where no problem to limit out on ducks with #4 lead or on geese (Canada's and Speckle Belly) with #2 lead. Usually was 2 3/4" 12 gauge for duck and 3" 12 gauge for goose - almost all I recall being used by self or partners was Imperial brand. A miss is a miss - can't blame that on the pellets!!! But, to my knowledge, nothing was ever patterned, nothing was ever tested ballistically - just what Dad used, so what I use. And birds fell down when shot at, so good enough.
Click to expand...

Yeah, i've been reading a bit of history on the "great shot transition", seems like a very odd time for those who were born and raised using lead.
As for myself, i've always been a statistical junkie (even though im not so great at math haha), and I like having that data to base my own marksmaship foundation off of. I know practice is always best for any skill, but having the WHY to go with the HOW always seems to help me out.
Now im wondering about FPS drop off with steel, since I bought some "1550 fps" shot...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom